Skip to main content

About your Search

20130801
20130831
STATION
CSPAN2 8
CSPAN 7
CNNW 2
KQED (PBS) 2
MSNBCW 2
KRCB (PBS) 1
LANGUAGE
English 24
Search Results 0 to 23 of about 24 (some duplicates have been removed)
of afghanistan and pakistan. that is no longer the case. osama bin laden is no longer their plotting against the u.s. and our allies. a does not mean there is not continuing threat posed by al qaeda, but that does not mean but that threat has changed because of the president's willingness to use force. there are other ways to work with the international community to reach objectives. the president took a trip to africa where he highlighted some of the strong relationships the united states has there. this is the work that the president vowed to do when he took office, which is to rebuild some of the relationships that were in tatters when this president entered the oval office. that strengthens the united states on the international scene. it is good for broader national security interests. but it is something that the president and members of his team have to work on something -- have to work on every day. >> more than 100,000 people have been killed. that is effectively like wiping out the entire city of south bend, indiana. how many more people need to die before the u.s. does employ some
the c.i.a. find osama bin laden. he worked for u.s. intelligence collecting d.n.a. to verify bin laden's presence. he was sentenced to prison in may of 2012. >> india has arrested its most wanted criminal, held on wednesday on the eastern border with nepal. the group has been linked to a group claiming responsibility for attacks in india. we are joined live from new delhi with more on that story. what can you tell us about the arrest? >> he was arrested on the indian-nipal border. it was a secret operation, he was arrested along with three other people. what we should say, though is it's unclear where the process goes from here or which stage it is at following his arrest. it will be watched with extreme interest across the country and region particularly for a country that certainly wanted a glimpse into the indian mujahedeen for sometime. >> all right. thanks very much for joining us out of new delhi. >> employee's teams in china are struggling with surging water levels after 33,000 people she cram waited. the military have been along the river. we have more. >> i know everyone's tir
the u.s. find and kill osama bin laden. the judge cited procedural issues, and ordered a new trial. dr. shakil afridi faced 33 years behind bars for providing money and medical help to islamic militants, allegations he denied. he also ran a vaccination program for the c.i.a. that helped locate bin laden. another major disclosure has emerged from documents leaked by former intelligence analyst edward snowden. the so-called "black budget" details $52 billion in spending this year, for secret u.s. intelligence efforts. "the washington post" reports that, among other things, the national security agency was investigating up to 4,000 reports of possibly security breaches by its own employees, last year. in economic news, the commerce department announced growth last spring was much better than first estimated at an annual rate of 2.5%. the numbers helped wall street overcome worries about syria. the dow jones industrial average gained 16 points to close near 14,841. the nasdaq rose almost 27 points to close at 3,620. those are some of the day's major stories. now, back to judy. >> woodruff:
. the most famous of all in 1998 when they were launched at osama bin laden in afghanistan only to have three years later launch the 911 attacks against the u.s. >> you're right, indeed. thank you, mick. joining me in studio, congressman gregory meeks, a member of the house foreign affairs committee. representative meeks, i understand you were briefed last night in a conference call. tell me what you learned from that call. >> i learned, first of all, the president has not made a decision yet, which i think is a good thing. >> contingent upon what? do you know what it is will be the tipping point? >> i don't know what it is. i hope he looks at it in its totality. you know, i was with the president most of the time. but i said from the beginning what is beginning is what should be the united states doing something unilateral. what is concerning me is all the reporting i'm hearing now. it's not the international community, it's the united states. it's not nato, it is the united states. >> france said they will offer support. >> there's so many other countries. we don't know, for example, where
with singing songs to osama bin laden and the 9/11 terror attacks. there's been a radical change in a lot of the makeup of the armed opposition which just doesn't look like the peaceful protests that we saw 2 1/2 years ago starting, calling for democracy and freedom after 40 years of dictatorships fr from the assad leadership. >> where does that leave the assad regime right now. fred flepleitgen, a short time , ben wedeman was speaking to members in the regime who told him they were relieve bid this delay, that president obama has put the brakes on at least for ten days asking congress for a vote. the syrian regime, he says, relieved and perhaps even planning a new offensive to squeeze in there over the next several days. before you left, what did you see in terms of movement in the regime's assets and what have you heard over the last several days? >> the regime has been stepping up its effort, especially in the damascus area over the past couple of days. the interesting thing was it really coincided with that alleged chemical weapons attack. many people on the ground were talking to us
don't see how a president who ran for his second term boasting about how he got osama bin laden, one bullet to the head and another to the heart has any grounds to quarrel with the concept. but the white house does not seem to be on board with that suggestion. here is jay carney at the press briefing. >> the president weighs his options. does he want to take out asad and would his death be a welcomed outcome at this white house? >> i appreciate the question and i want to make clear that the opgs we're considering are not about regime change. they are about responding to clear violation of an international standard that prohibits the use of chemical weapons. jon: brett stephens jon:s us now. you think jay is wrong. >> yes. and i think what we risk doing is an operation that puts the u.s. airmen, soldiers and sailors potentially in harm's way to accomplish very little. you don't undertake a military strike unless you have a genuine military objective. you don't undertake military strikes just to make a political statement or vindicate the president's threat from last year and earlier t
people would say that president obama the very right to launch azeinab badawi race that killed osama bin laden. history and diplomacy co-exist. they interact with each other and they sometimes can complement each other. richard holbrooke, the late richard holbrooke, great american diplomat, i don't think he would have been able to secure the peace in bosnia had we not used force for six weeks to demonstrate to the bosnian-serb army that we were not going to permit them to continue to kill innocent muslims. and it was that use of force that achieved the cease-fire and drove them to the negotiating table where holbrook worked his magic and brought peace to bosnia after five years of war. so there are times when we have to rely on our military and we're fortunate, as all of you know, to have extraordinary young men and women in our military and the army and the navy and the air force, marines and the coast guard and the national guard. [applause] and, like you, who just applauded, i admire the american military. they are absolutely critical to our security. one of the proudest moments of my
their safety concerns in this case and look at what the president has done, he is responsible for killing osama bin laden, using ground strikes to decimate al qaeda, building on the policies of the bush administration regarding torture. host: judy is next, idaho, good morning. appreciate the call. caller: i have two things to say. the first is quick and for your producers. you read almost all twitter tweets these days and hardly any e-mails. it is very hard to express a complicated idea in less than 200 characters. i wish you would pay more attention to the e-mail. host: ok. caller: to the subject at hand, i take the present threat seriously. but not as seriously as they wouldn't if these agencies had not been a exaggerating and combing length the effectiveness of their programs and the thoroughness -- i think they have undermined their own credibility by doing so. i wish they would stop it so that we would know when something should be taken seriously and when it should not. host: judy, thank you for the call from idaho. at can join the conversation facebook as well. george says -- host: chris
what it had to do. you saw president clinton went around all his allies, nato or the u.n., after osama bin laden blew up those east africa embassies in 1998. there's been very limited alliances hitting saddam hussein over various years during the late '90s. there is precedent to this. >> jimmy carter and his carter center in atlanta, peter, they put out a statement earlier today before the secretary of state's comments, before the intelligence assessment release, certainly before the president just spoke at the white house. among other things, the jimmy carter center said this. a punitive military response without a u.n. security councilman date or broad support from nato and the arab league would be illegal under international law and unlikely to alter the course of the war. what do you make of that, peter? >> you know, something can be illegal under international law but still be a le wrgitimate usf force which may seem like a paradox. certainly there is going to be no u.n. resolution. there will not be it looks like a nato kind of collective security article 5 type thing where, you
at the take-down of osama bin laden, when they came in one of the helicopters crashed but they had backup helicopters as a contingency plan. so that's all this is. no plans to put any marines on the ground anywhere and they don't even really see that that's a likelihood or even could happen by accident. >> okay. what are they talking about at the pentagon in terms of the timing of an assault? as you know, we had senator john mccain saying this could be a one-day event. in the pentagon, is there a suggestion maybe a multi-day or are they being definitive about that at all? >> well, it could be a one-day event if, in fact, these tomahawk cruise missiles are so accurate and they take out most, if not all of the targets that were originally aimed for. but usually, you know, after the smoke clears and the satellites hover overhead and they say oh, we missed this, we missed that, and there could be a cleanup strike for at least one day, and then perhaps a third. but people are looking generally at one, possibly two days. it would probably be extraordinary for three. but you know, that's always
in the 1980s in afghanistan when we armed the mujahadeen, now known as al qaeda, osama bin laden and others. that principle that was applied then was the enemy of our enemy is our friend. that's bad foreign policy. we should not be applying that in syria but we should be engaged in every possible way. i mentioned the russians a little while ago and in every possible way to get this under control. yes, hezbollah is tied up in this. the future of israel is tied up in this. we want israel to survive and prosper for everything it stands for but we also want -- >> time, sir. holt: we want a peaceful solution for palestinians in the area. what is going on in syria affects that. >> thank you, sir. madam speaker. oliver: i believe if the united states is to maintain its position as a world power and to dominate as a world power, it is incumbent upon us to pay attention to what is happening in syria. you know, it was very sad that we did not intervene and save more lives in rwanda and i know that there are many people in the international community who know that the united states could have done mor
people would say that president obama had every right to launch the raid that killed osama bin laden. history does demonstrate the forces of diplomacy coexist, they interact with each other and they sometimes and complement each other. richard holbrooke, the late richard holbrooke, great american diplomat, i don't think he would've been able to secure the peace at dayton, the peace in bosnia had we not used force for six weeks to demonstrate to the bosnian army that were not going to commit them to continue to kill innocent muslims but it was a just a force that she'd a cease-fire and drove them to negotiating table were holbrooke worked his magic and brought peace to bosnia after five years of war. so there are times when have to rely on the military and where fortunate as all of you know to have extraordinary young men and women in our military come in the army, the navy and air force, marines and coast guard and the national guard. [applause] wiland like you just applaud, i admire the american military. they are absolutely critical to our security. one of the proudest moments of m
what i'm going to ask you for a one-word answer. do you believe that osama bin laden for five years in abbottabad pakistan without anyone in the pakistani military intelligence knowing about it? >> no, don't believe it. >> i'm going to ask you for a 10 word answer. [laughter] >> this is my opinion. i don't think general kayani newdow. i don't think the leadership confab don't think there is think there was a plan of what he was that this was 700 meters from the gates of west point. who knows what 700 meters are from the gates of west point but the reality is it was a distinct compound. it was like the fun house at the end of the street where people didn't at the same as everybody else in the neighborhood in an area where people are not actually trusting so somebody facilitated something. i buy into the idea that the ambassador and i were talking about. it probably was not official but someone who has a relationship with an official who is providing help. there is a delegate to ask questions that need to be asked. there's a failure of due diligence. >> sometimes if you read new was s
, is you have to knock out these people. president obama did it with osama bin laden who was not a leader of a nation, but a leader of the al qaeda movement. the united states did it with saddam hussein. one of the questions, and it is a difficult and collocated question, and i do not want to pretend this is a self-evident answer in terms of what to do, is if i thought is gone, what is an openm? that question. you have analysts on both side of the issue that argue on the key question, which is how strong are the relatively moderate rebel forces in syria? theypeople say because were not aided earlier, they are too weak now and there's not much hope that they could help others, like one of the strategys of the surge actually said that rebel forces that are relatively moderate are fairly strong and we could make a difference. david up next from north carolina. good morning. caller: actually, that is wilson, north carolina. i would like to thank you for being so moderate. your art to a great job interviewing him. it is still speculation that this has not used chemical weapons against his own
to launch the raid that killed osama bin laden. history does demonstrate that force of diplomacy coexist. they interact with each other and they sometimes can come from each other. richard holbrooke, the late richard holbrooke, great american diplomat, i don't think he would have been able to secure the peace at dayton, the peace in bosnia, had we not use force for six weeks to demonstrate to the bosnian serb army that we're not going to commit them to continue to give innocent muslims. and effect it was the use of force that achieve a cease-fire and drove in to the negotiating table where holbrooke worked his magic and brought peace to bosnia after five years of war. so there are times when how to rely on our military and we are fortunate as all of you know to have extraordinary young men and women in our military, in the army, the navy, air force and marines and coast guard and the national guard applaud that. >> and like you who just applauded, i admire the american military. they are absolutely critical to our security. one of the proudest moments of my crew was when i served as u.s.
you believe that osama bin laden head for five years in pakistan without anybody in the military or intelligence knowing about it? >> that i'm going to ask you for ten words. they don't believe it? >> then is just my opinion. i don't think the general knew that. i don't think that the leadership -- i don't think there was a plan for where he was the this was 700 meters from the gates of west point. who knows what 700 meters, but the reality is a three distinct and compound -- it was like a funny house at the end of the street people didn't act the same as everybody else in the neighborhood in the area where people are not naturally trusting. so, somebody facility did something. malae sort of buying into the idea that the ambassador and i were talking it's not official but it can be someone that has relationships with officials was actually providing the health and there is a failure to ask questions that need to be asked and a due diligence. >> if you read president musharraf's book, he talks about [inaudible] and sestak then there were three houses that were al qaeda houses that
of osama bin laden come of the president's reelection campaign and you may know her from her great work with the politics team at usa today and the managing editor of the american journalism review. next to rachel is jen pendry and who is not on your program. originally we were going to have an al jazeera reporter here but she has gone over to the mainstream and is now working for cnn, making her ineligible for the panel. so jen kindly agreed to step in and we appreciate that. she is the white house reporter for the huffington post and covers leadership on capitol hill. she joined huffington post a couple of years ago and spent years covering the legislative and executive wrenches of government for "rollcall." probably a walk in the park for her because she started covering the texas state legislature. again, stepping in for camille, so thank you for that. next to jen is john stanton who also has "rollcall" roots rate he is the chair of buzz feed here in washington. then smith, the editor described him as a reporter's reporter with being in his veins. he's a third-generation news man an
they were funded, where the training camps were. on 9/11 we did not know that. we knew osama bin laden was back, but that was the extent of our knowledge. the way we kept the country safe was get that intelligence and according to the agency itself, the way we did that was by subjecting him --because he was ejected more than anybody else -- to enhanced integration techniques. this administration does not get it. they do not. obama made a speech here not too long ago to the national defense and basicallymay said ok, now we are returning back to the tree-9/11 days. we are not at war anymore. we are going back to pre-9/11. we will go try to round up the guys when they blow up. we are no longer on a war footing, if you will, in terms of thinking about the state we're in. i think that is dead wrong. totalan absolute misreading of where we find ourselves today. as i look at that part of the world am a north africa, a good part of the middle east, not just afghanistan, where they launched 9/11 from, but also yemen and the major struggle underway in egypt, the muslim there,hood taken power th
. we knew osama bin laden was in pakistan but that was the extent of our knowledge. the way we kept the country safe was to go get the intelligence. according to the agency itself, the way we did that was by subjecting him, because he was subjected more than anybody else to enhanced interrogation techniques. why do i tell you all that history? this administration doesn't get it. they just don't and, obama made a speech here not too long ago. it was at the national defense university, maybe three months ago in may, and, basically said, okay, now we're returning back to the pre9/11 days, i.e., we're not at war anymore. we're going back to pre9/11, when it is just a law enforcement problem and we'll try to round up the bad guy when blows something up and we're no longer on a war footing, if you will in terms of thinking about the state we're in. i think that's dead wrong. i think it is an absolute total misreading where we find ourselves today. as i look at that part of the world, now, north africa, a good part of the middle east, not just afghanistan, where they launched 9/11 from but
and where that person is. if osama bin laden had been calling someone in the united states on their cell phone, i promise you it wasn't a stockbroker. we better know because these people are still plotting against us, and not if but when they strike again, the american people are going to turn to us and ask us, what has the federal government been doing to prevent this? we better have a good answer. because we live in a very dangerous world, one, by the way, where our enemies aren't just other countries anymore. our enemies are rogue states and their well-armed militias and radical clerics. this kind of danger calls for a clear strategic vision on foreign policy and this president sadly does not have one, which brings me to my third and primary concern about ms. power's nomination and it is one that is related to the united nations itself. we need an advocate in new york who makes it their primary focus to ensure that the united nations is more accountable, that it is more effective and that it efrbs u.s. interests and -- serves u.s. interests and is not a multilateral ideal in which we
would say that president obama had every right to launch the abbottabad raid that killed osama bin laden. history does demonstrate that its diplomacy coexist they interact with each other and they sometimes can complement each other. richard holbrooke the late richard holbrooke great american diplomat. i don't think he would you woule been able to secure the peace in bosnia had we not used force for six weeks to demonstrate to the bosnian-serb army that we were not going to let them continue to kill innocent muslims. in fact the use of force achieved a cease of fire drove them to the negotiating table where holbrooke worked his magic and brought to peace to bosnia after five years of war. their times we have to rely on our military and we are fortunate as all of you know to have extraordinary young men and women in our military in the army navy air air force marines and the coast guard in the national guard. [applause] and like you who just applauded i admired the american military. they're absolutely critical to our security. one of the proudest moment of my career was when i served as
Search Results 0 to 23 of about 24 (some duplicates have been removed)